SomethingMusic
No bio...
User ID: 181
I have no clue how governments and 'healthcare' agencies can expand these programs. I know it's a boomer Republican talking point, but the more self-mutilation and suicide medical programs I see getting pushed into the public consciousness the more I feel like the medical zeitgeist of a death cult has taken control of our society and its terrifying. Eugenics never went away, they just call it humanitarianism and focus it on the most productive culture the world has ever seen.
The left motte and baily would be at the moment looking for a ceasefire but in reality wanting Palestinians to destroy Israel for some reason. I believe I agree your notion that the 'far left' and the 'establishment' are so intermingled it's hard to separate the real ideas of the two as they often align for whatever political motivation they push the Overton window.
I probably poll more libertarian at the moment because I don't highly respect authority (probably because authority seems to keep getting it wrong in the worst ways possible). I've taken a few political compass map polls and I tend to lean conservative in those, though less so than I would expected for myself.
Grilling is definitely a hobby I'm interest. And breadmaking. A personal goal is to smoke a brisket but I'll probably never have the time/disposable income/space to do it.
Care 31% Loyalty 31% Fairness 50% Authority 22% Purity 56% Liberty 83% Your strongest moral foundation is Liberty.
Your morality is closest to that of a Libertarian.
I definitely have libertarian sympathies, but I would still consider myself more conservative than libertarian, especially among popular social issues. What I find surprising is that I personally find loyalty very important in friendships and relationships, so that loyalty is so low is something surprising to me.
I find it ironic you consider the idea of a women 'selling her body' as loaded language in recent vernacular when and then proceed to issue the statement "After all, I would argue that a woman who marries a man for his money (to a first approximation, most women who have ever existed) is 'selling her body' to a much greater degree than a prostitute, who is merely renting it. And yet the wife is held in much higher esteem than the jezebel." which is a much more modern interpretation of marriage popularized in the last decade.
It's clear we won't come to agreement. I think the modern materialist/rationalist/objectivist notion that marriage is generally a pragmatic institution based off of materialism and risk aversion is generally false in a historical sense beyond well documented edge cases. This simplification is what largely damaged marriage as an institution and changes the game theory to make marriage seem risky with no real benefit. When marriage was considered a permanent union, people prioritized very different things in a partner than simply material wealth. The modern consumptive and transactional nature of sex and marriage has created significant costs in population growth and stability, family stability, and child rearing.
The overlying question surrounding Hlynka's hypothesis is "does the reasoning matter if the end result is the same?" and can be applied to many horseshoe arguments made - be it segregation, racism, economics theory, etc.
There probably needs to be continuing questioning along the lines of "if you could press a button and both sides would immediately ceasefire, would you?". For example, I think an alt right person probably would choose continuing conflict to instead of any sort of peace or cease fire, while a far left person would probably support any sort of ceasefire, even if they perceive the opponent as 'evil'.
Besides, the ancients didn't bother differentiating between actresses and pornographic actresses, but one still married justinian.
Lumping all countries and cultures and all of human history into one singular example needs a big citation needed. Also, are your examples the average result or the exception?
Please stop arguing semantics. I hate when discussions devolve into word games as a way of avoiding the actual validity of an argument, and if this is the line of reasoning you're going to choose I'm not going to entertain this discussion further.
If word choice is your problem, is 'renting' better than 'buying'?
Either way, the negative externalities of turning sex into a consumptive act to be exchanged as a market is something that should be discouraged, regardless of age.
Given the context of the discussion, what kind of actresses do you think we were talking about?
If they sold their body for ten million dollars, they would not end up as 2nd class people.
But they do, and the evidence of this is clear: how many prostitutes and former actresses have ended up in successful happy functional relationships? The evidence is clear that reputation destruction (and whatever psychological damage that happens during the repeated engagement of promiscuity) that women receive when they engage in these acts is fairly permanent and follows them throughout their lives, even if their acts cause financial success.
At the cost of turning sex into a consumer transaction? You might argue this already exists and has always existed in some for of human history, (which you would be partially correct), but I think the consequences of widespread acceptance of this practice are largely damaging to cross gender relationships, especially the perception of women, as well as damaging to formation of families. Even historical practices of marrying women to richer/more wealthy men focuses on marrying and producing heirs, not simply for carnal desires. Women who sell their bodies for money have rarely been treated more than 2nd, or 3rd class people and do it at the cost of having a successful long term relationship.
Or people who vote 'no' value their morality and beliefs over capital and short-term self-interest. I rather value that most people are unwilling to compromise, at least hypothetically, for something that increases short term capital wealth. Selfish individualism is why I can't get behind objectivism, so the fact that twitter males largely deny the right gives me hope for the respondents of the poll.
That's why I started doing it. I wouldn't say I don't think it's necessarily be super consistent, but it's helping me reflect on the day and take the time to organize and recognize thoughts.
My work is very boring and I'm quite dissatisfied with it as it's pretty intellectually uninteresting to me and it's become pretty apparent it's a dead-end job whose only upside is doing some managerial nonsense of overlooking other people who are doing the same boring task. I've been looking for exits but haven't ran into one yet that I found that works.
However, this week I started journaling to have something creatively constructive and stimulating going on at work. I've always wanted to journal but I always felt like I've never had the time. One of the reasons why I started posting here again is because it feels like stream that's been undammed. There's been a lot I've kept bottled up the past few years and finally letting it out onto a page has been surprisingly therapeutic. I wrote a blog while in college and find it's pretty similar, but I can write a bit more personally as well or not be as focused on a topic and drift about. The pen and paper aspect of it is also nice as it gives me a break from looking at a screen.
Just because no Jews can trace their personal history to caanan doesn't mean that they don't consider it the cradle of their culture and their birthright. This is why understanding religious idealism is so important that everyone here is conveniently ignoring which is why I wrote this post, it's not about "I was here first" or "I can trace my family here for 1000 generations". It's about those many generations of Jews having a shared religion and belief structures that through the literal millenia as a nation without a home, that they are united through the Talmud and religious texts that they have a birthright destined by God. 60% of Israels population is Jewish in some degree, do you think that they don't know the history of their people and that it doesn't necessarily require a direct physical lineage?
Reaching out for help and input. I always have this fear that they'll look down on me or simply reject me out of hand, but reaching to others for help is something that can be so useful. I'm writing this now as motivation to reach out to some professors I've studied with in the past for help with some problems I've been having. Going it alone is pretty impossible, we need to bump into people to help optimize solutions for problems that arise over life.
Even if Israel is as unreliable and selfish as your purport, do you think any other middle eastern country would not be the same if not worse? Do you think any other country in the area would be amenable to having US military presence and US businesses operating in their country with relative freedom and autonomy?
Turkey? All of these countries would be way happier with the West if we weren't supporting Israel, their mortal enemy.
Turkey also has significant political unrest with Erdogan and is essentially an authoritarian regime. I would guess the US military would be worried about parking bases there with the human rights violations and the potential for Erdogan to attempt to seize military assets one way or another. What you/Arab nations see as a problem is what US sees as something they can easily work with. Support for Erdogan by the west would also be political suicide for any politician who would endorses such a move as to their human rights violations.
Israel's semiconductor production is pretty puny, all things considered. Malaysia also produces a fair few microchips, so what.
Maybe in terms of total chip volume, but if the Intel press release is anything to go by the loss of the Fab would put the company in an awful spot. Also, decentralization of foundries seems to be a pretty good idea in general.
Something that modern analysis of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict fails to understand is the insane length of the timeline of the conflict and how it changes and shifts the perspectives of these two cultures. It's easy to look at this as an eighty year-old conflict as the state of Israel was established and recognized by the UN in 1948, but the truth is that this is a conflict of literal biblical proportions. Even with Israel becoming increasingly secular over the years (currently around 40%), 60% of the population is still practicing Judaism on some level of observant. This conflict and intermingling of peoples comes to a head in the book of Joshua when God commands the Jews to genocide out the nation of Canaanites as entry into the promised land. Israel's failure to do so has perpetuated this conflict for the past 2000 years.
The importance of this not only as a denote of how long the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has lasted, but also defines their relationship, one of violence and antagonism. Our much more recent historical conflicts shows how much chaos happens when one people subjugates another. In the US' failed occupation of Afghanistan and Iran, there has been little to no success of actually changing the populations political or social alignment at all - as soon as we left the old regime quickly took control the power vacuum and ultimately are as or more cruel as it ever was. England's conquest across the globe has also failed to significantly change the political and social rules of the old societies once England absconded from their (former) territories. Total obliteration and oppression seems to be the most effective method of instilling new values in a society.
I think this perspective creates a better 'screen' in which to view this most recent upheaval, this is not something new, but rather something incredibly old involving religious and historical contrivances as old as the Talmud and the torah.
If we were favouring Israel because it advanced our interests, that's fine. But that's not the case. It doesn't do us any good to anger the Arabs, who can cause many problems for us and have much more to offer. Reason dictates that we throw Israel under the bus, so we can strengthen relations with more important countries. I see your surgeon and I raise you the petrol station, the latter is more important.
But it does. Who else in the area is sympathetic to western ideology and willing to house western military bases?
Israel is also one of the intellectual powerhouses in the region. Intel has a 17 billion dollar foundry there. It's become an important industrial and manufacturing area of high level technology in the world. There is huge incentive for the US/west to support Israel beyond slave morality.
Not really, the lefts pathological obsession to support the perceived 'underdog' makes it easy to determine which side they will take on any given conflict. This need overwhelms their decision making to the point that young leftists will self destruct to support the perceived minority and perceive that the majority is totalitarian in nature that we see plaguing US cities today. The right don't view the world in terms of underdog/establishment dichotomy but are looking at the world in terms of stability and utility, which lends them to pro-Israeli positions as there are major US interests in the middle east and Israel is the primary launching point for these interests.
I'm probably too late but here's my suggestions:
For pc building try pcpartpicker.com They have prebuilds as well as pricing data mining to ensure you're getting the best price for whatever parts you want.
GPUs are really expensive for no reason, the 2nd hand market might not be as awful as you think it is - especially for GPUs. I wouldn't use 2nd hand mobos or psus.
If you aren't doing any video editing or productivity an AMD gpu might be better - be aware that their drivers aren't as good.
I've gotten into the first hour of Chained Echoes. I think they both looks pretty cool but I'm a huge sucker for pixel art nostalgia.
I much prefer twitch/dogfighting space combat in my space games instead of what Starfield seems to offer, so ultimately I didn't even download it.
I admit I'm very interested in what Star Citizen wants to do as it's much more what I'm looking for in a space game, but I really want to wait for an actual release schedule than what they're doing right now which largely seems grifting people out of large sums of money.
I don't think it's necessarily an intelligence issue as much as an ESL issue. Currently America is being overwhelmed with non-English speaking aliens ranging from South America to Africa to Somali to Eastern European. None of these people speak English at a high level or are particularly knowledgeable about proper English grammar. A large part of it is being out of practice as well; I know my own knowledge of grammar isn't particularly strong either especially when it comes to sentence structure. This leads to people passively learning 'well enough' communication where there's a general understanding of direction but no nuance.
Maybe this is the lesson of the tower of Babel. When a civilization has the means and resources to build a massive tower, economic opportunists who do not understand and have limited ability to communicate start crating stagnation through gridlock - no one can understand each other well enough to organize logistics.
More options
Context Copy link